| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
proof |
need for an explanation |
|
Summary:
Onus on CEIC to establish that statements were made knowingly. If they are clearly false, the burden of proof is then on claimant to explain the circumstances, i.e. to provide a reasonable explanation. Whether the explanation is reasonable and sufficient is a question of fact.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
proof |
need for an explanation |
weight |
Summary:
Since the Board accepted as reasonable claimant's explanation that he was suffering from alcoholism and that he had many personal difficulties at the time of the false statements, there can be no half-way measure of accepting it only to the extent of reducing the penalty. Penalty set aside.
The onus is on CEIC to establish that statements were made knowingly. Where they are clearly false, the burden of proof is then on claimant to explain the circumstances, i.e. to provide a reasonable explanation. Whether the explanation is reasonable and sufficient is a question of fact.
